I had planned to sit in on five different customer 'problem interviews' led by a startup founder, let's call him Fred. Now Fred can debate the right way to build a startup with the best. He is a visionary and believes he can change the world. However, his product sales have been poor. I believe Fred is suffering from founder denial. He believes strongly that most CIOs rate the problem he solves in their top 5 priorities. So using the scientific method, we agree to test Fred's opinion (or hypothesis) - will the interviewed CIOs rate Fred's problem in their top 5 for this year? We prepped well, crafted good questions and agreed NOT to try to sell anything.

Interview 2 – after I cautioned him – Fred used the interview guide (2 questions) but put the CIO on the defensive, when the answer to question 2 was not the answer Fred was hoping for

Interview 3 – after a yellow card – Fred used the agreed interview questions under protest but felt they cramped his natural style

Interview 4/5 – I bowed out of the interview process as I felt I was cramping Fred's style.

I met an excited Fred a week after the customer problem interviews had been completed. I naively expected that Fred might have changed his views (a little) after the CIO interviews. Not at all. ''They don't understand'' he claimed ''Wait until I come back to them with a finished product, then they'll understand''

No matter what tools or processes you use – the human factor of founder denial needs to be managed carefully.